Diane Darrough v. Tobacco Superstore, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
No.
DIANE DARROUGH,
08-587
Opinion Delivered June 19, 2008
APPELLANT,
APPELLEE’S MOTION TO DISMISS
APPEAL
VS.
TOBACCO SUPERSTORE, INC.,
APPELLEE,
DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Appellee, Tobacco Superstore, Inc. (TSI), has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal filed
by Appellant Diane Darrough, contending that Darrough has failed to designate the entire
record on appeal and continues to “refuse” to supply this court with any additional portions
of the record.
The circuit court dismissed Darrough’s claims against TSI with prejudice by order
entered February 15, 2008. On March 13, 2008, Darrough filed a timely notice of appeal in
which she designated only certain portions of the record for appeal purposes. On March 20,
2008, TSI filed a “designation of additional record” in which it contended that Darrough’s
notice of appeal did not comply with Ark. R. App. P.—Civ. 3(g), in that Darrough failed to
disclose her points on appeal; in addition, TSI designated “the entire trial record, including
all pleadings, exhibits, and proceedings, to be included in the appellate record.” On March
24, 2008, TSI filed a notice of cross-appeal in which it asserted that, due to Darrough’s notice
08-587
of appeal and its own designation of additional record, the cross-appeal did not “require
designation of any additional record or the ordering of any transcript.”
In response to TSI’s additional designation, Darrough wrote to TSI’s counsel on
March 28, 2008, and stated that she would pay for the record that she designated, but TSI
would be responsible for payment of any additional portions that it sought to have included.
Darrough then filed an amended notice of appeal and designation of the record on April 21,
2008, in which she specified her point on appeal; however, her designation of the record
continued to list only portions of the record. Following further correspondence in which TSI
“disagreed” with Darrough’s conclusion that she was only responsible for paying for that
portion of the record that she had designated, TSI filed an amended designation of additional
record on April 28, 2008, in which it again named additional documents to be included and
also sought inclusion of the transcript of a hearing held on January 3, 2008.
TSI filed its instant motion to dismiss Darrough’s appeal on May 15, 2008. In its
motion, it complains that Darrough continues to refuse to supply or pay for the additional
portions of the record that TSI designated. TSI acknowledges that it cross-appealed some of
the circuit court’s orders and that “some parts of the record are relevant only to its crossappeal.” However, it maintains that additional portions of the record are necessary for
consideration of Darrough’s direct appeal. For example, it notes that Darrough did not
designate TSI’s answers to her original and amended complaint, TSI’s memorandum in
support of its motion for judgment on the pleadings, its reply to her response to its motion,
or the transcript of the hearing on the motion.
-2-
08-587
Darrough responds that her sole argument on appeal is whether the circuit court erred
in entering, as its order, a precedent prepared by TSI that was not consistent with the court’s
ruling. She asserts that the only portions of the record necessary for a consideration of this
question are the trial court’s ruling, the order proffered by TSI that was entered by the trial
court, her objections to the order, and her motion to vacate or modify the order. In addition,
her notice of appeal designated the complaint, the amended complaint, TSI’s motion for
judgment on the pleadings or alternatively for summary judgment, and her reply to that
motion. She contends that TSI’s requests to have her designate and supply the entire record
is nothing more than an attempt to require her to “incur unnecessary and unreasonable
expenses in preparing parts of the record that are not relevant to Darrough’s appeal, but are
relevant only to its cross-appeal.”
Rule 6 of the Arkansas Rules of Appellate Procedure—Civil governs the record on
appeal, providing in relevant part as follows:
(b) Transcript of proceedings. On or before filing the notice of appeal, the
appellant shall order from the reporter a transcript of such parts of the
proceedings as he has designated in the notice of appeal and make any financial
arrangements required by the court reporter pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. §
16-13-510(c). If the appellant intends to urge on appeal that a finding or
conclusion is unsupported by the evidence or contrary thereto, he shall include
in the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such finding or conclusion.
If the appellant has designated less than the entire record or proceeding, the appellee, if
he deems a transcript of other parts of the proceedings to be necessary, shall, within ten
(10) days after the filing of the notice of appeal, file and serve upon the appellant (and
upon the court reporter if additional testimony is designated) a designation of the
additional parts to be included. The appellant shall then direct the reporter to include in
the transcript all testimony designated by appellee.
(c) Record to be abbreviated. All matters not essential to the decision of the
questions presented by the appeal shall be omitted. Formal parts of all exhibits and
-3-
08-587
more than one copy of any document shall be excluded. Documents shall be
abridged by omitting all irrelevant and formal portions thereof. For any
infraction of this rule or for the unnecessary substitution by one party of
evidence in question and answer form for a fair narrative statement proposed
by another, the appellate court may withhold or impose costs as the
circumstances of the case and discouragement of like conduct in the future may
require; and costs may be imposed upon offending attorneys or parties.
(Emphasis added.)
The Reporter’s Notes to Rule 6(b) comment that the rule “makes no provision for
adjustment of costs where the record is supplemented at the request of the appellee.
Normally, appellant bears the initial expense and the Arkansas Supreme Court can thereafter
make the proper adjustment of costs upon request of one of the parties.” Ark. R. App.
P.—Civ. 6 (Reporter’s Notes (as modified by the Court) to Rule 6, ¶ 2). Here, Darrough
designated those portions of the record that were relevant to the sole point she intends to raise
on appeal. If TSI, as cross-appellant, felt that other portions of the record were necessary to
its arguments on cross-appeal, it was incumbent on it to designate those portions and make
any financial arrangements required by the court reporter. Rule 3(e) of the Rules of
Appellate Procedure states that a notice of appeal or cross-appeal:
shall specify the party or parties taking the appeal; shall designate the judgment,
decree, order or part thereof appealed from and shall designate the contents of
the record on appeal. The notice shall also contain a statement that the
appellant has ordered the transcript, or specific portions thereof, if oral
testimony or proceedings are designated, and has made any financial
arrangements required by the court reporter pursuant to Ark. Code. Ann. §
16-13-510 (c).
Ark. R. App. P.—Civ. 3(e). Thus, it was TSI’s own burden to see to it that those portions
of the record it felt were necessary to its cross-appeal were included in the record; it was not
-4-
08-587
Darrough’s burden to anticipate TSI’s arguments on cross-appeal and prepare, at her expense,
the record that TSI wanted.
TSI’s motion to dismiss is denied.
-5-
08-587
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.